18 replies to this topic

[DonnaFontenot]

So when the mighty Penguin struck way back in...I don't know when, but something like six months ago, a company came to me asking me to help them recover. Long story short, they needed to get rid of excessive footer backlinks, links that looked like paid backlinks (and some were), etc.

The really tough part? Getting the client to be patient and wait for another Penguin update to roll around so we could determine if the efforts were going to help or not.

Six months later. SIX MONTHS. To a client, six months of waiting is forever.

Client: "Should we do this? Will that help?"
Me: "No, nothing will help until Penguin runs again."

Client: "How about this? Would that help?"
Me: "No, nothing will help until Penguin runs again."

Six months of those questions and answers.

And now, FINALLY, Penguin has run again, and the client's rankings have recovered. Finally, I can get some peace. LOL!

[EGOL]

Nice work!

Great story about holding your ground until the attack is over.

[iamlost]

Well done on your part - the temptation to 'fiddle' can be quite intense... my followup question is: has your client learned from this to diversify traffic away from Google? Of course THAT is (NOT?) what they've had you doing the last six months...

[DonnaFontenot]

Learned to diversify away from Google? ROTFLMAO! You are so so funny!

[EGOL]

has your client learned from this to diversify traffic away from Google?

I competely understand the point of this statement - and agree with the general philosophy.

However, for me, at least, that would have a lower ROI. Just sayin.

I am just trying to build great websites and taking the traffic from whereever it is coming from.

Lots of traffic is coming from outside of google, but G is still the big driver.

[jonbey]

Yeah, Google accounts for something like 90% of search in the UK now, while I would love to spread my risk, it is not going to happen in a hurry!

I have been trying to get the SM ball rolling, but it seems to be rather difficult.

[cre8pc]

The Twitterverse is screaming sounds of pain and anger at the latest Penquin waddle. So far, Donna, your news is the only good report yet

[DonnaFontenot]

Really Kim? Wow, I would have expected a lot of sighs of relief as efforts produced results. Huh. Been too busy today to see what others are saying, but I guess I'll make time to go check it out.

[jonbey]

Good to hear that someone can "recover" from Penguin. I was wondering if it was more a case that sites which had relied on poorer SEO (directories, article sites etc) in the past were suffering an the only solution was to get new links. Donna, this is the first account I have read (although I did not search hard for others) of real "negative SEO" and the reversal of that helping recovery.

[DonnaFontenot]

Well, I wouldn't call it negative SEO because the clients shot themselves in the foot. No one got those terrible links for them. They accumulated the links themselves over several years. But I can attest that they didn't go out and get new links to get out of this penalty. They strictly went through a huge process of getting rid of backlinks that looked like possible suspects for a penguin penalty.

The worry was twofold.

1. I might have encouraged them to get rid of too many backlinks. What if I had them remove links that were actually helping rather than hurting? Then, when Penguin waddled back through, even if the penalty was lifted, it was possible that they wouldn't recover because now they would be missing links they needed to keep their rankings. Luckily, that didn't happen.

2. I might have missed some bad links, and didn't encourage them to get rid of enough. Then, when Penguin waddled back through, the penalty wouldn't be lifted, and we'd have to start pruning some more (or look elsewhere for issues), and then wait another six months (??!!) for the next waddle. Luckily, that didn't happen.

But the whole six month waiting period meant never knowing if what you were doing was enough or too much, and realizing eventually, that if the next waddle didn't help, then it might be a long, long, long time before the next round of "fixing" would work or not...and then another wait would begin. I'm not sure I could have kept the client sane for another six months. Or me.

[jonbey]

It is this bit that I assumed would be "negative SEO": "excessive footer backlinks, links that looked like paid backlinks (and some were)"

Maybe just getting rid of most of those led to recovery? Sounds a bit like my Panda recovery - I made so many changes in the last few months before recovery that I really do not know what specifically led to the recovery, I just know what I did and that some of it worked!

[DonnaFontenot]

Well, in my mind, negative SEO refers to having your competitors (or anyone who wants you to lose rankings) placing those types of links to your site in the hopes of you getting penalized. When you do it yourself, it's just shooting yourself in the foot, but doesn't qualify as "negative seo".

And yes, getting rid of those links is, I assume, what led to the recovery. That was certainly the goal!

[Dr.Marie]

Donna, yours is the only recovery I have heard of so far. I am thinking that sites who have excessive footer links pointing at them can recover because in many cases they can get the footer links removed and therefore remove a huge percentage of links.

But, for sites that have participated in widespread article spam with links pointing back at their site the task for removal is way to huge. Plus, the webmasters who host these article sites are less likely to respond to requests for link removal.

I've been helping a lot of people with unnatural links (manual) warnings, but I've been afraid to take on people with Penguin issues.

[jonbey]

When people have these footer links etc. are they usually pointing at the homepage? I was thinking for any links pointing at internal pages you could just change the URLs of those so that the links point to 404's instead.

[DonnaFontenot]

Jon, in my client's case, yes, the footer links generally all pointed to the home page.

Some of my client's main phrases (very competitive btw) actually ended up even better than before Penguin. Instead of being #2 or #3, for instance, some are at #1 now. And in case you were interested, Penguin had originally moved their rankings down into the 50's, 60's, 70's, 100's, and below. So it was a major fall, and now a major recovery.

[Doc Sheldon]

Nice work, Donna! I'm sure you've got yourself a loyal client and advocate for life!

I'm presently helping someone with similar problems, that is laboring under simultaneous Panda, Penguin and O.O.P. slaps, which began last year. Trying to determine what got hit for what reason, and what will or won't help has been a real education for all concerned. We've seen partial (relatively minor) recovery, but of course, there's no way to be certain what fixed it or even which penalty was partially lifted.

Transparency in what passes for "communication" from Google is non-existent, so I can understand how a blind man in a whirlwind feels, as does the site-owner. I'll share your success with him, as he's nearly convinced that recovery is impossible. Your success may give his spirits a lift.

[DonnaFontenot]

Doc, I feel for those who are caught in multiple traps. Trying to get out of one is bad enough, but having to fight against Panda, Penguin, and other penalties all at the same time would be exhausting!

[DonnaFontenot]

Gotta love it. I share this here at Cre8, not really thinking much about it, figuring it might help someone here, and today, it becomes "news" at webpronews, which lead to a few people thinking I made it up (comments made there and on seroundtable's post). Why? Because they didn't recover, and they haven't heard of other recoveries, so obviously I must be lying in order to get clients. Bahahaha! Here I am trying to get away from SEO and clients, and move to just writing books, and I get blasted for trying to scam people into hiring me for SEO. Whatever, dude!

[Black_Knight]

Not only have I seen other recoveries, but I've also seen a lot of the differences between the sites that were hit, and sites that were not. Let the doubters doubt. Many of them need to doubt to feel better about their own inability to recover. If that's how they choose to react, rather than to observe and learn, then all the better for all decent SEOs.

You are right that paid backlinks can be a big no-no. Where Google is certain they have been paid for, and that there are many of them, its one of the few times that negative SEO can be done. It is risky and expensive to try to use this for negative SEO, and I certainly do NOT recommend it, but for the first time, such link manipulation of others is possible, even if unreliable and inefficient.